Israel's Gift to a Terrorized World

No country's soul has been more severely tested than Israel's.

The BBC recently invited me to a panel discussion on the subject "Is Israel Losing Its Soul?" Cynics can be forgiven for noting a certain improvement in the network's attitude toward Israel, by assuming that Israel still has a soul to lose. Unfortunately, I couldn't make the debate, but if I had participated, here's what I would have said:

"Before dissecting the flawed soul of Israel, I'd suggest we discuss the collective soul of Palestine and, by extension, of the Arab world. Israel, after all, was ready to become the first country in history to voluntarily withdraw from its historic heartland and share sovereignty over its capital city. By contrast, Palestinian society has become prisoner of a death cult that celebrates mass murderers as religious martyrs and educational role models. And, unlike the Israeli soul, which is torn over the price we must pay for self-preservation, the Palestinian soul shows few signs of remorse for its culture of national suicide."

No country's soul has been more severely tested than Israel's. Only Israel has faced terrorism from its creation; only Israel confronts an enemy that considers its existence an offense.

Only Israel confronts an enemy that considers its existence an offense.

The vitality of our soul is tested daily in the intensity of our dilemmas. How do we reduce humiliation at the roadblocks while controlling an enemy that uses ambulances to smuggle explosives belts? Which is the more moral decision -- to kill Hamas leaders along with innocent Palestinians or allow mass murderers to escape and risk the lives of innocent Israelis? How do we maintain basic human sympathy for Palestinian suffering without encouraging Palestinian self-pity and avoidance of blame for creating this disaster?

Not all our answers to those and other challenges have been wise. Sometimes we yield to immoral power, sometimes to immoral weakness.

Still, it is our struggle for balance between security and morality that is a sign of the vitality of the Israeli soul. In the global war against terror, Israel is humanity's laboratory for testing the limits of a democracy under permanent siege.

The value of that experiment is ignored by Israel's foreign critics. But not only by them. Our own ideologues of left and right demand a simplistic resolution of the tension between security and morality. Dogmatic leftists -- like the Israeli human rights activists who petitioned the international court against the security fence -- perceive the Palestinians as a benign minority merely seeking freedom, rather than as part of a regional majority that wants to uproot us and denies the legitimacy of our being. For their part, dogmatic rightists despise the democratic norms we've imposed on ourselves and want nothing more than to be freed of those constraints.

In measuring the state of our soul in the war against terrorism, I would suggest two criteria. The first is our ability to withstand terrorist blackmail. That is not only a tactical but a moral necessity. If Israel surrenders -- for example, if we negotiate substantive political issues under terrorist fire -- then terrorists everywhere will be encouraged to persist. If Israeli society can be broken, terrorists will realize, then any society can be broken.

The fact that we haven't surrendered to a terrorist assault intended to atomize Israeli society by frightening us away from our public spaces is Israel's gift to a terrorized world. Arguably no other Western nation could have withstood the sustained atrocity assault we've endured over the last three years and still remain basically intact.

Burg ends his eulogy for Israel by appealing to Israel's friends abroad to help us once again become a light to the nations. But that's precisely what we've been during these last three years.

In a recent article decrying what he called a "failed Israeli society," former Knesset speaker Avraham Burg wrote, "Israel, having ceased to care about the children of the Palestinians, should not be surprised when they come washed in hatred and blow themselves up in the centers of Israeli escapism." In fact, our ability to maintain those "centers of Israeli escapism" and refuse to be intimidated is proof of our moral health. Burg ends his eulogy for Israel by appealing to Israel's friends abroad to help us once again become a light to the nations. But that's precisely what we've been during these last three years, even if much of the West and some on the Israeli left don't realize it.

When we weigh our tactics in the war against terrorism, the psychological impact on terrorists should be a central consideration of our decision-making. By that measure, the prisoner exchange agreement between Israel and Hizbollah, which frees hundreds of terrorists and rewards kidnapping, is immoral. Not surprisingly, Hizbollah leader Nassrallah boasted, just after the exchange was announced, that he would now initiate additional kidnappings of Israelis. President Moshe Katzav's declaration that he was ready to pay "any price" for the return of Ron Arad was likewise an immoral psychological empowerment of terror.

The question of unilateral withdrawal is not just a political but a moral dilemma. Ehud Barak's Lebanon withdrawal, on the eve of final status negotiations with the Palestinians at Camp David in 2000, only encouraged the Palestinians to "learn to speak Lebanese" as some Palestinians put it at the time. The current terrorist war is, to some extent, a result of Barak's flight from Lebanon. These days, a single terrorist attack can produce as many casualties as Israel suffered in a year of combat in Lebanon. That is the price of surrender.

If the Sharon government wants to ensure that unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and parts of Judea and Samaria won't empower terrorism, it needs to balance withdrawal with a tough message to the Arab world. Annexing those parts of the territories still in our possession after withdrawal, for example, would make the point that terrorism exacts a price not only on the society that is targeted but also on the society that encourages it.

The second criterion for judging the state of Israel's soul is the vitality of our democratic institutions and culture. We note with justifiable pride that Israel is the Middle East's only democracy. But that's not just a debating point against Arab propagandists: it also imposes responsibility. As the sole Middle East democracy at a time of radical transition for the region, the responsibility to be an example of democracy under stress is even more acute.

Yes, it is maddening to see Mustafa Dirani, who sold Ron Arad to the Iranians, appear in an Israeli court to sue for six million shekels in compensation for abuse he claimed he endured under interrogation. But decisively resolving the unbearable tension inherent in our war against terror, in favor of either an absolutist human rights agenda or an absolutist security agenda, would destroy the essence of Israel's soul, which is the ability to sustain paradox.

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 8

(8)
Anonymous,
February 6, 2004 12:00 AM

comment

This is my personal opinion. Im not Jew, but im completlly on the side of Israel.
I would never, personaly, negotiate with Arafat,man who is notorious liar, terrorist and deciever. I dont knew country in the world who will to that, but when that happaned to Israel, than you need to negotiate. This double standard, one for Israel and another for the rest of the world makes me sick.
Personally, i dont feel sorry for Palestinians at all. Thay can only blame thamselves, Arafat, Hammas, etc...
Im just thinking what thay will do if somebody comes, and for every church or synagogue destroyed, that person blows couple of moscues.
P. S. Personally, i think that is the only way thay will understand.

(7)
Anonymous,
February 5, 2004 12:00 AM

Self preservation is the only thing we should talk about

I reject the discussion of Israel's "soul" while we are being constantly terrorized. There should be no discussion of a soul when our enemies are so ruthlessly killing us. The reason that the Palestinians are so successful in their propaganda is that they refuse to even engage in this discussion. It is important to "stay on message"as it is put in political campaigns. We should keep the discussion on the offensive, which is to say that if we don't get peace in our land- the "Palestinians" will be forced to find a home in one of the massive Arab lands. There is no soul where there is no body. Security is the only thing that we should discuss. Why do Jews always let others control the agenda??

(6)
Marlene Josephs,
February 4, 2004 12:00 AM

Comment on your article and Howard G's comments

What a right-on article! My husband and I go to Israel frequently to both support the people and economy and because two or our three daughters are there along with our son-in-law who is learning and our 6 month old Sabra granddaughter. The resiliency if the Israeli people is second to none. As much as I love the US and am proud of my fellow Americans in the wake of 9/11, by comparison, the American people would pale under such horrendous circumstances as the Israelis have had to endure since 1948, but especially these past 3 1/2 years.

In response to Mr. Howard G, the person to blame is William Jefferson Clinton who handpicked Barak and essentially had him elected by the Israeli people by sending over "Mr. Clean" to help Barak with his campaign. Clinton's peace plan and the fact that he invited Arafat to the White for the first time in history and had him there more than any other head of state gave Arafat the chutzpah to plan and implement the present Intifada II that the Israeli people have been enduring for the past 3 1/2 years.

Just wanted to get the record straight for Mr. G. Clinton's actions not only gave Arafat the green light for terrorism, but also bin Laden and Hussein. And let the rest of the liberal American Jews and even the Left wing Israelis beware: If Kerry should, G-d forbid, get elected instead of George Bush being re-elected...Kerry intends to send to help the "settle" the mideast problems...the two WORST Presidents that Israel has EVER had to endure: Carter and Clinton. Give me George Bush, Jr. any day!!

At the end of the day, folks...the solution to our problems in Eretz Yisrael is for ALL of our Jewish brethren (and sisters) to ALL turn to the heavens and beg Hashem to prevail on our behalf. We did it once before and He took us out of bondage so long along in Mitzrayim (Egypt). If anyone thinks that ANY human is going to settle this problem, you are all only deluding yourselves. G-d only wants ALL of us to acknowledge His Existence and Ulitimate Power and ask for His help...that's all. It's as easy as that...but is it Really that easy for most Jews to give up their stubborn bent on being too educated, too sophisticated, too modern to believe in such hooey?!!

(5)
Barbara,
February 3, 2004 12:00 AM

love the entire piece.

I must applaude the writer for the direct and honest reporting on the hemoraging heart of Isreal.

(4)
John,
February 2, 2004 12:00 AM

A Broken heart

My heart is broken by the inhumanity and atrocities suffered by the Israel people at the hands of the murderous Hamas and others of the same ilk.

(3)
Yermi,
February 2, 2004 12:00 AM

Compare 1992-1999 with any other time

Let's take a brief trip down memory lane and see what Howard G considers a wonderful time of "productive peacemaking"

5. July 30 '97 Two suicide bombings in the Mahane Yehuda market in Jerusalem, 16 slaughtered

The list of Jews maimed and murdered by Arab attackers using bombs, guns, and knives from '93 to 2000 goes on and on just as it always had, but I doubt such hard and disapointing truths have any consequence to the "Howard Gs" out there, who would prefer to disregard history and the opinions of those who care about innocent lives, and instead to embrace murderers and their supporters.

(2)
Jeanne,
February 2, 2004 12:00 AM

ISRAEL NEEDS TO STAY STRONG.

I enjoyed your article. I wish the world would realize that Israel has shown restraint in light of terrible situations. I pray for the government to stand strong against opposition and not give up land for a false peace.
G-d bless.

(1)
Howard G,
February 1, 2004 12:00 AM

Compare 1992-1999 with 1999-2003

I agree that the exchange made little sense for Israel. However, to say that peace-making has been unproductive is incorrect, in fact it is the get tough tact that has been the failure.

1. There was a peace-making process from 1992-1999, and indeed before. Skilled US intermediaries negotiated various interim agreements. We had peace in Israel, widespread tourism, success on both sides. During this time, some Israeli and US right-wingers condemned the process, wait till we get tough, then you'll really see success, they explained.

2. Sharon came in 2000, and where is our success, where are the great things that were promised with this get tough policy.

3. Blame George W. Bush. Abandoning a peace process that George Bush, Sr. Clinton, and Reagan used with success was a huge blunder. Is Israel better off now than she was 5 years ago, 8 years ago, 10.

4. I long for the days of peace and prosperity in Israel, aggresive US involvement in the peace process, and Jewish newspapers in our land saying
the US is putting too much pressure on Israel.

5. Arafat was a corrupt and inefficient administrator and even many Arabs were unhappy with his economic stagnation and using Palestinian funds as his private bank account. However, telling another party in negotiation who they can use is a recipe for failure. This exclude Arafat policy was a collosal failure. Again blame George W. Bush and his inefficiency. The same incompetence in that peace process, and exclusion of Europeans is making Iraq and Afghanistan a fiasco too.